G.R. No. L-40004, January 31, 1975
BENIGNO S. AQUINO, JR., ET AL., petitioners, vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, AND NATIONAL TREASURER, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioners, including prominent opposition figures and religious leaders, filed a petition for prohibition seeking to halt a national referendum scheduled for February 27, 1975. The referendum, called by President Ferdinand E. Marcos, sought public approval for his continuation in office and for various reforms under martial law. Petitioners challenged the referendum’s constitutionality, arguing that President Marcos’s term had expired under the 1935 Constitution and that he lacked the authority to exercise legislative powers, including calling a referendum, under the 1973 Constitution. They contended that the 1973 Constitution, though ratified, had not been properly implemented as the interim National Assembly had not been convened, leaving a constitutional vacuum.
Respondents, the Commission on Elections and the National Treasurer, defended the referendum’s validity. They argued that the questions raised were political in nature and thus non-justiciable, and that petitioners lacked legal standing. They maintained that President Marcos remained the legitimate “incumbent President” under the Transitory Provisions of the 1973 Constitution, which granted him continued authority, including the power to legislate, until the interim National Assembly was convened and elected new leadership.

ISSUE

The primary issue was whether the scheduled national referendum called by President Ferdinand E. Marcos was constitutional, hinging on the legal status of his presidency and his authority to exercise legislative powers under the 1973 Constitution.

RULING

The Supreme Court, through the main opinion of Justice Makasiar and various separate concurring opinions, denied the petition and upheld the constitutionality of the referendum. The legal logic centered on the interpretation of the Transitory Provisions (Article XVII) of the 1973 Constitution. The Court ruled that these provisions unequivocally recognized Ferdinand E. Marcos as the constitutional “incumbent President.” Specifically, Sections 3(1) and 3(2) authorized him to continue exercising the powers of both the President under the 1935 Constitution and the combined powers of the President and Prime Minister under the 1973 Constitution until he convened the interim National Assembly to elect its interim leaders.
This grant of power included legislative authority. The Court held that the clause stating all “proclamations, orders, decrees… promulgated… by the incumbent President shall be part of the law of the land” constituted a direct constitutional warrant for President Marcos to legislate. The calling of a referendum was deemed a valid exercise of this executive-legislative power. The Court further noted that the people had previously affirmed this status in a July 1973 referendum. On the justiciability of convening the interim Assembly, several concurring justices viewed the timing of such a convocation as a political question left to the President’s discretion. The petition was dismissed for lack of merit, cementing President Marcos’s authority to govern and initiate plebiscitary measures during the transitional period.